We have not received any apologies so we expect a full attendance. I ask anyone attending remotely to mute themselves when not contributing in order that we do not pick up any background noise or feedback. As usual, I remind all those in attendance to ensure that their mobile phones are on silent mode or switched off entirely.

Members attending remotely are reminded of the constitutional requirement that, in order to participate in public meetings, they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex. Witnesses within the confines of Leinster House are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentations they make to this committee. This means that they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and it is my duty as Cathaoirleach to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if any of the witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person or entity outside of the Houses of the Oireachtas or an official of the Houses either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The item on today's agenda is inclusive education: education and training requirements for initial teacher education, ITE, and continuous professional development, CPD. I warmly welcome from Mary Immaculate College, Professor Niamh Hourigan, vice-president of academic affairs; from Hibernia College, Dr. Mary Kelly, president; from St. Patrick's College, Dublin City University, Professor Joe Travers, director of the centre for inclusive pedagogy; and from Marino Institute of Education, Trinity College Dublin, Dr. Elizabeth Flanagan, lecturer in inclusive and special education at the department of inclusion, religion and well-being.

I now call the witnesses to make their opening statements. We will firstly hear from Professor Hourigan, followed by Dr. Kelly, Professor Travers and finally Dr. Flanagan. They will have five minutes each. The opening statements will be followed by questions from the members of the committee. Today each member will have a six-minute slot. Given the time constraints we will need to stick quite rigidly to our timing today to ensure we get everything covered.

I thank the Chairperson and members of the committee for the invitation. I am Professor Niamh Hourigan, vice-president of academic affairs education at Mary Immaculate College, MIC, commonly known as Mary I.

Mary I has been in existence since 1898. Our starting point as an institution in terms of education is the child. We believe that every child is a capable, contributing participant in their own learning and in their own community, and that childhood matters in the present. It is not simply about preparing for adulthood; it is about how the child actually experiences being a child. It is about whether they can participate, belong and flourish.

Inclusive education is at the core of initial teacher education in Mary I. All undergraduate bachelor of education students study inclusive and special education in their coursework. Every single undergraduate student studies inclusive and special education. They also bring this learning into their school placement. On top of that, approximately 22% of our undergraduates take a dedicated elective specialism in special education. Inclusion is embedded in our early childhood undergraduate programme and in our psychology provision. We have a combined BEd and psychology programme which is a pipeline into the educational psychology doctoral programme that we run. We make a very strong contribution to the talent pipeline for educational psychologists in this country.

MIC has co-ordinated the national DICE project. DICE is about development and intercultural education. Beyond that, our postgraduate diploma in special inclusive education serves primary and post-primary teachers alike. We are a significant contributor to CPD for current teachers as well as our own undergraduates through this postgraduate diploma in special inclusive education. We have been sustaining that programme for years with our own resources before there was public funding for that programme. Public funding still does not cover the cost of that programme for us but we remain extremely committed to it.

The second point that is important for us to make is that inclusion is a whole workforce endeavour in Mary I. Since 2015 we have delivered a programme called LINC, leadership for inclusion in the early years. We like to see inclusion as something that runs through the whole course of childhood, from the child going into crèche right through to the child doing the leaving certificate. We provide post-primary courses in Thurles. LINC has focused on those early years practitioners and has now produced over 3,000 graduates leading inclusive practice across 27 counties in Ireland. LINC is important not just because of its scale but because it demonstrates - this is something we have done in partnership with Government - that sustained public investment, accredited professional learning and practitioner experience can significantly increase national capacity in terms of inclusion and education.

On top of that, we have a certificate and diploma in autism studies with the Middletown Centre for Autism, which is one of Northern Ireland’s leading centres of autism expertise. Our professional doctorate in educational and psychology is one of the leading educational and psychology programmes in the country. We have just won funding from the Higher Education Authority, HEA, to expand and increase the number of places on that programme, responding to the huge dearth and need around educational psychology.

At the other end, we have developed a tertiary pathway programme into initial teacher education. This is designed to bring students from more diverse backgrounds into initial teacher education. Part of the thinking around inclusion is that people cannot be it if they do not see it. Therefore, for children coming from a range of diverse backgrounds, it is better for them if they can see teachers from similar backgrounds in front of them in the classroom. That is something we are leading at in the sector.

Our view is that there is a particularly important role for continuing professional development, CPD, for current teachers as well as the contribution and role we have with undergraduate and initial teachers.

I will talk about the work we have done with families and communities around inclusion. We have the transforming education through dialogue, TED, project in Limerick, which focuses on disadvantaged and DEIS schools. We also have the embracing diversity, nurturing integration project, EDNIP. Basically, the project works with a range of migrant groups. Since 2017, we have supported inclusion and integration across five DEIS band 1 schools in Limerick city, with more than 1,000 children and 900 families impacted. Through our National Centre for City Connects Ireland, NCCCI, which we initially developed in partnership with Boston College and the Department of education, we deliver a whole child-centred approach in 18 schools in Dublin's north-east inner city. This has now been extended to 13 schools in Limerick and 12 in Tallaght. This is part of the whole DEIS plus initiative and learning from the city connects programmes in the US, which showed that a wraparound approach, where all the services are connected through a co-ordinator, has a significant impact in turning things around, particularly in dealing with deeply disadvantaged children.

We in MIC feel we make a significant contribution to inclusion, not only as a result of our role in initial teacher education but through our role in CPD and our project work in the community.

I thank the committee for the invitation. Hibernia College recognises that inclusion and inclusive education encompass a broad and multifaceted range of practices. For the purposes of today, inclusive education refers to teachers’ knowledge, skills and professional learning that enhance their capacity to recognise and respond effectively to the diverse needs of learners in front of them. It seeks to promote meaningful participation, remove barriers to learning and ensure that appropriate structures, supports and arrangements are in place so that every learner can achieve their full potential.

We believe that achieving inclusive education relies on a coherent, whole-of-system understanding of what inclusion means and a shared commitment to translating this into practice across policy, leadership, teacher education and school settings. This includes effective initial teacher education, ITE, and ongoing teacher professional learning systems that equip teachers with the knowledge, skills and confidence to respond to diverse and complex needs.

The framework for all accredited ITE programmes in Ireland is provided by the Teaching Council’s Céim standards. The professional master of education, PME, primary and post-primary programmes within Hibernia College consist of a sequence of modules that reflect the contemporary issues faced by teachers today and provide them with the skills and knowledge required of them in order to become expert teachers who enable effective pupil learning. We place significant emphasis on inclusive practice, professional values, collaboration, well-being, literacy and numeracy, and developing reflective, research-informed teachers. Diversity and inclusion are themes that run across all of our academic study, professional studies and school placement experiences. Student teachers identify, reflect on and critically analyse inclusive teaching methodologies across all modules, as well as the implementation of a universal design for learning, UDL, framework. These inclusive methodologies and practices are then implemented and assessed during the school placement experience phases.

Throughout their learning, students also explore how barriers to learning and participation can arise, how schools can support pupil voice and agency and how teachers can work collaboratively with families, colleagues and specialist services. Through engagement with practical frameworks such as the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA’s inclusive education planning tool and the National Council for Special Education, NCSE’s principles of neurodiversity-affirming practice, student teachers learn how responsive planning and appropriate pedagogy can support participation, engagement and success for all learners.

However, embedding a culture of inclusive education is not only about the what and how we teach future teachers. It is also about recognising, valuing and supporting diversity within the teaching profession itself. We must consider who has access to the profession and the range of perspectives and experiences represented within it. The diversity of our classrooms and communities is increasing and our teaching workforce should, as far as possible, reflect and understand that diversity. At Hibernia College, we recognise that many people face a range of barriers to entering the teaching profession, including geography, caring responsibilities and the practical demands of combining study with family life. Our blended learning model, underpinned by a UDL approach to learning, is designed to address many of these barriers by combining flexible online learning with in-person education. By lowering geographic and physical barriers, blended learning attracts students from a wide range of backgrounds. That diversity enriches the classroom itself. Learning becomes not just about absorbing information from lecturers, but also about engaging meaningfully with peers who bring different experiences and perspectives.

However, inclusive education cannot be addressed solely through ITE. As learners’ needs become more diverse and our understanding of inclusion continues to evolve, teachers need opportunities to return to learning, deepen their expertise and develop new areas of competence. At Hibernia College, we have developed a master’s and postgraduate diploma of arts in inclusive and special education in collaboration with our partner, the Institute of Child Education and Psychology Europe, ICEP Europe, providing teachers with the opportunity to develop more advanced knowledge and expertise in this area. This non-funded programme, with an intake of approximately 180 students each year, demonstrates the commitment of teachers to funding their professional development in this area.

More recently, we have been looking at how we can broaden access to professional learning through micro-credentials, allowing teachers and other education professionals to engage with specific areas of inclusion in a more flexible and targeted way. Importantly, our approach to inclusion extends beyond special education. Our work in counselling and psychotherapy also recognises the importance of well-being, relationships and the emotional dimensions of learning. If we are serious about inclusive education, we need to recognise the whole learner and the wider factors that influence participation, belonging and educational success.

As we look to offer master's programmes in speech and language therapy and occupational therapy, we hope to further strengthen this approach by developing a more multidisciplinary model of professional education, equipping practitioners with the knowledge and skills to work collaboratively across education, health and therapeutic services.

We at Hibernia College believe that inclusive education is not simply an area of study. It should be seen as a principle that shapes the entire professional learning journey.

I thank the committee for the invitation. In the context of Ireland’s ratification of Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD, on the right to inclusive education, the NCSE’s advice on the progressive realisation of inclusive education, the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs, EPSEN, Act review implementation plan, the EU technical support instrument on fostering inclusive quality education, the Education Therapy Service, ETS, initiative, the special needs assistant, SNA, workforce plan, the expansion in specialist provision, and the Céim standards, the expectations on teacher education are onerous and increasing. We know that children in the system are experiencing exclusion, expulsion, suspension, reduced timetables, distress, trauma and school avoidance.

Building on a tradition going back to 1961 in St. Patrick’s College, Drumcondra, the DCU Institute of Education has a dedicated school of inclusive and special education with 20 academics and a research centre focusing on inclusive pedagogy, with staff supervising 40 doctoral students in the area. The school contributes to the faculty’s initial teacher education programmes alongside other schools and offers nine post-graduate programmes in inclusive and special education to teachers and others.

Internationally, some countries have separate teaching qualifications for general and special education teachers at initial teacher education level, while others have mandatory post-graduate qualifications in inclusive and special education or in aspects, such as for special educational needs co-ordinators, SENCOs, deaf education or vision impairment.

We have a different approach. All teachers are expected to be qualified to teach all learners in initial teacher education, ITE. There is optional access to limited postgraduate qualifications alongside non-accredited CPD opportunities.

Graduates from primary and post-primary ITE programmes have been considered to have appropriate competence to teach in a range of teaching roles, including special class, special school and special education teacher. In terms of advancing inclusive education in teaching in DCU, all 12 of our initial teacher education programmes and early childhood programmes have core elements in inclusive education in line with Teaching Council accreditation processes. It is promoted in the widest sense as a core value and principle across disability and special educational needs, educational disadvantage, gender, religion and ethical education, sexual orientation, intercultural education, linguistically diverse learners, anti-racism and human rights education. The approach uses a combination of discrete modules, embedded, permeated approaches where inclusive education and social justice are integrated into the programmes and opportunities in placement for application and reflection and in specialist elective modules. An innovative pathway, which is a first in any university, for deaf Irish Sign Language users to become primary teachers has resulted in the first graduates of this programme in 2023.

In terms of research advancing inclusive education and equality, DCU Institute of Education has dedicated research centres with a strong social justice and equality orientation. Professional placements are a significant element of our programmes, where students undertake practice in early childhood, primary school or further education settings as part of their studies. These include special class and school settings.

However, there is a clear tension emerging between more inclusive forms of teaching and learning, and the demand for further separate provision in the system in the form of special schools and classes. From a situation where Ireland had 2% of the student population in separate provision, this figure is now heading for over 5%. This increase in separate provision is problematic from an educational, social, ethical and human rights perspective. Our responsibility is to teach teachers for all contexts, and to meet the needs of all learnings, but also as reflective and agentic professionals in questioning the assumptions underpinning policies and practices in schools that may lead to unnecessary separation.

A key consideration in terms of values, skills and knowledge is what is appropriate at initial teacher education level and what is best developed at induction and continuing professional learning. There is a huge demand among teachers for accredited professional learning. Our school offers nine postgraduate programmes. These cover intellectual disability, dyslexia, autism, inclusive and special education, neuro-affirmative leadership and gifted education. Two of the programmes are funded by the Department of Education and Youth, namely, the graduate diploma in inclusive special education and the graduate certificate in autism education. Some 566 teachers since 2021 have applied for 110 places on the graduate certificate in autism education. The number of yearly places, at 18, has not changed since 2004. On the graduate diploma in inclusive education, over the past six years 212 teachers have applied each year for 115 places, with five more places added this year. The evidence from completion of the programmes points to increased confidence, competence and skills of teachers.

To realise inclusive education in the widest sense in local schools, we need a transformational programme of professional learning at a systems level. It needs to move beyond a focus on individual competence to capacity building and shaping the conditions which support inclusive teaching and learning. It requires an intersectional, rights-based equality approach. It needs to offer sustained critical and reflective professional learning that is context-sensitive. Inclusive education is fundamental to how we see the purposes of education and the importance of learning to live together as much as learning to know and to do. It is foundational for a republic that values democracy, social cohesion and economic justice.

Marino Institute of Education, MIE, welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the joint committee’s consideration of education requirements of education and training for inclusive education. With more than 120 years’ experience in initial teacher education, MIE currently prepares primary teachers through four undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, delivered through English and Irish.

At MIE, inclusive education is fundamental to our understanding of education and to the kind of institution we seek to be. Our mission commits MIE to promoting inclusion, quality and excellence in education for the public good, grounded in the dignity and potential of every person. Our vision of a just, sustainable and transformative education for all and our guiding principles of person-centred learning, respect for individual difference and accessibility provide the foundation from which our approach to inclusive teacher education emerges. Inclusion is therefore not simply something our students learn about; it is something we seek to live institutionally and embed through their experience of becoming teachers.

This commitment is realised through a deliberate combination of dedicated study of inclusive and special education and the infusion of inclusive practice throughout the ITE programme. Students encounter universal design for learning, differentiation and planning for diverse learners across curriculum areas including literacy, numeracy, science, drama, physical education and the arts. Inclusive practice is consequently positioned not as the responsibility of a specialist teacher but as a fundamental dimension of good teaching in every classroom. This embedded provision is complemented by substantial dedicated study. Our undergraduate students undertake two inclusive and special education modules, engaging with legislation, policy, disability and neurodiversity alongside the practical application of evidence-informed approaches to a wide range of learning differences and disabilities. This learning is assessed through authentic professional tasks. Students construct pupil profiles and an individual student support plan, and subsequently incorporate individual targets within group and whole-class planning, closely reflecting the realities of inclusive classroom practice.

In the final year, students can deepen this expertise through an elective module supporting learners with special educational needs in all school settings, taken annually by approximately 40% of our cohort. This addresses complex inclusive practice, including curriculum pathways, SNA and therapeutic supports, collaboration with families and professionals, behaviour, regulation and inclusion of learners with more complex needs.

A particularly distinctive feature of MIE's approach is our determination that students should experience inclusive education rather than encounter it only theoretically. Throughout school placement, students teach across diverse contexts and are required to plan for the needs of all learners. During their final extended placement, all students undertake a further three-week enhanced special education-focused experience. They work alongside special education teachers, engage with special classes, individual pupils and small groups, participate in planning processes and examine the school's whole-school approach to inclusion. Importantly, this experience is explicitly assessed through portfolio work and a post-placement oral assessment. This has been a long-standing feature of MIE provision and anticipated the enhanced emphasis subsequently placed on inclusive education by the Teaching Council.

Even more significantly, all MIE ITE students undertake a separate, immersive two-week special educational placement in a special school, special class or other appropriate setting. Students move into supported professional practice, planning and teaching classes, groups and individual learners. They develop pupil profiles and student support plans, and select appropriate methodologies, resources and strategies for all learners. MIE provides trained placement tutors to support students during this experience and has included, where possible, direct observation and assessment of their teaching.

Inclusive practice is also reinforced through research. Every ITE student completes a research dissertation enabling students who select inclusive education to investigate an aspect of provision systematically and connect research evidence to classroom practice. This is a significant area of student engagement, with 24% of 145 final-year BEd students and 22% of our professional master of education, PME, students currently undertaking research in the area of inclusive education. Professional relationships and engagement with parents are progressively developed across ITE in MIE through authentic and simulated professional experiences, including parent-teacher conferences, collaborative planning, communication of assessment information and engagement with external professionals.

MIE’s approach is therefore deliberately integrated, progressive and practice-intensive. Inclusive education flows from our institutional mission and principles and while explicitly taught through dedicated modules, is also infused throughout curriculum and pedagogy. Our ambition is not simply that the graduates know about inclusion but that they leave MIE having planned for it, taught within an inclusive and special education setting, researched it, reflected critically upon it, and experienced their own responsibility for making inclusion real. In this sense, preparation for inclusive education is not one component of becoming a teacher at MIE, it is integral to what we understand becoming a teacher to mean.

Unfortunately, MIE is not one of the six centres or HEIs funded by the Department of Education and Youth to offer the postgraduate diploma programme of teacher professional learning for special education teachers. This is a fully funded programme where participating teachers are released from their schools for a block of eight weeks during the academic year to attend campus. While we offer short summer programmes to teachers which specially address inclusion and special education, we would welcome the opportunity to offer long-term accredited and funded programmes, as is the case with other HEIs.

I thank Dr. Flanagan. I welcome Professor Teresa O'Doherty, president of Marino Institute, and her colleagues. I do not know the names of her colleagues but Teresa lectured me many moons ago at Mary Immaculate College. It is great to see her leading the Marino Institute. She is very welcome.

We have just received apologies from Deputy Catherine Callaghan. We will now proceed to members' questions. I flag that we are tight on time. If every member speaks for their allotted six-minute slot, we will drift over time by about three or four minutes. We often give people extra time of 30 or 40 seconds. Unfortunately, we do not have that latitude today. When members are asking questions, I ask them to leave enough time for the witnesses to respond. Politicians have an awful habit of asking witnesses a question when there are three seconds left on the clock. We will try to work collaboratively and we will get through it.

I thank all of the witnesses for the information. I have a question on the initial teacher education and that idea of all teachers teaching all students. Are each of the witnesses confident that every trainee teacher comes out of their training programme and is confident to go into the varied and diverse classrooms that are out there now? I hear from teachers with lots of experience that they feel they do not have the confidence to go into a special school or class. Are the witnesses confident that our programmes are comprehensive enough and equip our teachers? If not, how would they improve on it? Is two weeks not enough? Should it be more? Should it be mandatory? On the 40% figure, should it be 100%?

My second question is about the balance between initial teacher education, CPD and informal education. Obviously, it involves lifelong learning. I particularly ask about the issue of demand for those additional pieces. What does a good system look like? To me, it obviously does not look like 500 people applying for 120 places. Professor Travers might answer first and we will then work across, if that is okay.

I thank the Deputy. I will start with the first part of his question about initial teacher education. Initial teacher education does what it says on the tin. It is initial, it is foundational and it is absolutely crucial. In terms of inclusive education, it has been conceptualised as an apprenticeship of the heart, the head and the hands - the knowledge, the skills and the attitude or disposition. In terms of special and inclusive education, you are looking to develop the identity of the teacher as an inclusive educator so they absolutely see themselves as being responsible for all learners. That attitude is really important.

They are also developing skills as reflective practitioners and having a research orientation. Yes, they are absolutely going out prepared to go into the field but the induction and continuing professional development element is absolutely crucial in terms of further developing that knowledge and those skills. We do not expect those in other professions, like doctors, to have all of the knowledge initially. It is about the other components.

On the second part of the Deputy's question, the weakest part of the teaching-learning continuum is the CPD component. We know from the-----

Do teachers have to fund a lot of this stuff themselves?

Yes. Of our nine postgraduate programmes, seven are self-funded. The appetite among teachers for continuous professional development, particularly in this area, is absolutely huge. As I said earlier, we have 40 teachers undertaking doctorates at a minimum cost €16,000 - that is commitment. There is huge interest in this area and developing skills and knowledge but it requires a lot more support.

To answer the first part of the Deputy's question, right now, all of our students obviously do inclusive and special education but we also have a mandatory inclusive and special education placement in MIC. All of the students in the undergraduate programme have either been in an autism unit or a special school and have done a piece of work around that. It has to be said that our programmes and all of the programmes have been through two big rounds of accreditation where inclusion has become much more central than it was. It is fair to say that you could have a teacher in their mid 40s who had a programme that was quite different in terms of the place of inclusion in it compared with somebody who is coming out now at the age of 22 or 23. As Professor Travers says, they are on a journey but they are much better prepared for that journey now.

In terms of the CPD question, which I personally feel is vital, there is the expectation in the system that all teachers should be able to do this at some level. We are seeing that a whole tranche of teachers love this, are really committed to it and want more skills but there is also a group who recognise they do not have enough but are not willing to commit to a full programme. Something more like what we had, which was a link approach, could work. There is a need for gradation with CPD. There is a massive difference between someone who wants to do a PhD in inclusive and special education and someone who wants to do a micro-credential. However, the micro-credential might still make a bit of a difference in terms of how they cope with being in a very challenging classroom. There is scope there.

There are only 30 seconds left so I apologise to the other two witnesses. How do we get to that place? Where does that conversation need to happen to move it on? Is it the Department of education?

It is the Department but also Oide, which is responsible for CPD. It is about the gradation and the steps of the stairs for the level of commitment people are able and willing to put in.

The witnesses are most welcome. There was a very strong theme across all four statements of inclusion, which is commendable. I really liked the notion that the starting point is with the child. That was really nice to hear. I will ask each witness a very brief question. In terms of the future of inclusive education, what elements do they think need to be improved?

It is the continuous professional development aspect. There is the initial teacher education and a professional masters in education, which is a jam packed two-year programme. As my colleagues said, we give people the knowledge, skills, values, dispositions and research informed mindset to go out, along with the skills they need. It is becoming more complex and what teachers are facing in front of them every day is more complex. It is about that commitment to continuous professional development.

Oide does a great job. The NCSE has excellent provision in terms of resources for teachers as well. It is just about more of that and more of that flexibility but it is also important it is planned. At the moment, it is down to an individual teacher deciding they will do that. We have seen the willingness and how many sign up and pay for that themselves but a planned, structured approach to ensure the needs will be continuously met and that teachers will be upskilled is needed.

Two years ago, I worked with the Primary Curriculum Support Service, PCSP, and we introduced the learning support guidelines. We brought teachers out for provision and education. We went into schools and we sat with teachers. That continuous support and professional development in a sustained and structured way to really ensure we will meet those future needs is important.

We need to make sure our students are leaving with that solid foundation, which they are doing at the moment, but also the mindset of inclusive teaching. CPD will be incredibly important for that. We need two CPD in two ways - whole school training for all teachers, not just teachers coming into the fields, but also need specialist courses for more complex needs in the system.

The courses need to be accessible as well. I worked for the NCSE a number of years ago and the number of tickets that went in for support was unreal at that time. It was difficult to match the need in a timely fashion. The schools have really called out for ongoing, rather than one-off, support. There are courses and seminars available but that sustained support is what schools need as they become more inclusive.

To add to the points my colleagues have made, we are increasing the diversity of teacher education itself and, in addition, our experience has been that when teachers come to our initial teacher education programmes from very disadvantaged backgrounds, they are snapped up as soon as they graduate, often by schools in those communities. There is a powerful multiplier effect for students in those schools to see someone who went through that school or grew up in that community coming back as a teacher. Historically, there tends to be a particular type of person who comes into initial teacher education. In addition to the CPD, that aspect of bringing in a greater diversity of experience is going to be critical.

We have serious structural gaps in terms of CPD, which have been pointed out by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. The system is voluntary, fragmentary and ad hoc. There is insufficient focus on leadership for inclusion and on whole-school opportunities for inclusion.

In terms of a transformational programme of inclusion, we would be talking about sustained support in schools and models of mentoring, coaching and modelling. It would require a very different perspective in terms of teacher professional learning. It would involve developing professional learning communities that are sustained in the long term. That approach will take time to bed down.

There is a need for interdisciplinary CPD, with teachers and therapists working together. With the roll-out of the education therapy service, there are challenges for both professions in terms of crossing boundaries, as it were, and working closely together for the benefit of learners.

There are gaps in specialist knowledge when it comes to CPD, including in regard to deaf education, visual impairment, severe and profound learning disability, and special educational needs co-ordinators, SENCOs. We do not have the structures in place in the Irish system for specialist qualifications to meet those needs.

I thank the witnesses. The clock started after I started speaking, so I will give back the time remaining.

Thank you, Deputy Roche. The next speaker is Senator Scahill.

I might try to avail of Deputy Roche's remaining time as well as my own.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. We are engaged in a large body of work on this issue, with a lot of sittings and engagements with a large number of witnesses already. The whole way through the process, we have been focused on CPD and ongoing teacher training and how we can ensure that is there to support teachers. A lot of teachers graduated quite a long time ago, with many specialising in individual modules and having expertise that probably was ahead of its time. However, what I see from engaging with schools and individuals is that almost every situation in every school around the country is quite individual and bespoke.

I will talk about CPD presently. With regard to ongoing teacher training, a lot of the training offered up to now involves online remote learning. The feeling is that more hands-on work is needed, so it is great to hear what the witnesses are saying in that regard. How do they see this ongoing training happening without worsening the substitution and staffing pressures schools are already experiencing? I refer to the blended learning approach that was suggested.

The context of teacher shortages absolutely presents an issue and a dilemma at the moment. For example, we have a postgraduate programme, funded by the Department, in which 120 teachers are participating. We prioritise teachers in special schools to come on that programme because they work with children with the most complex needs. Of the 120 places, we have eight applicants from special schools. Why is that? It is because principals find it very hard to release teachers in special schools to do the CPD. They would find it very difficult to get substitute cover to release those teachers. There are barriers there in terms of the release time for teachers to engage in accredited CPD.

There are other models that can be more school-based. Teacher professional learning communities that are facilitated, sustained and given support over time can be really impactful in that they can address the actual issues in schools and because they have a greater understanding of the context in which the teachers are working. There are different models out there but there are definite barriers at the moment in the context of teacher shortages and the fact that the teachers working with the most vulnerable children in the most complex settings are the least able to engage. This CPD is fully funded, by the way, with fees paid and provision for substitute cover.

I am conscious of the time remaining to me. I want to get to the other witnesses. Professor Travers did a report that was funded by the EU through the technical support instrument, TSI.

The project was undertaken by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education.

Am I correct, however, that Professor Travers was involved in or supported it?

We informed the agency.

Okay. One of the points made in the report is that inclusive education should be mandatory or incentivised. If the Government were to take the incentivising approach, and it would have to be incentivised for the individual and the school because, as we know, a lot of teachers are paying for this themselves, what incentives would Professor Travers suggest?

From 1961 until 2011, teachers who did the funded postgraduate programme got an additional allowance in their salary. That was stopped. There definitely should be a financial incentive for teachers to do accredited CPD. The reinstatement of that allowance would be a step forward.

I met representatives of the INTO last night and that particular measure came up in our discussion.

That is understandable.

I was wondering whether there are other measures Professor Travers might suggest in terms of reliefs. However, I am looking at the clock and it is telling me I must move on.

The witnesses all have hands-on experience. They have all presented individual CPD programmes, with two-week, three-week or eight-week immersion programmes included within those individual courses. It would be useful to the committee if they could send us something after the meeting setting out any evidence they have that shows student impacts where staff members have completed the individual programmes, rather than just impacts on teacher confidence, etc. I would be interested to see anything they have on the impacts on students.

Will Professor Hourigan provide a little more information on her LINC programme? I have 25 seconds remaining in my slot.

LINC is a really good model because it is focused precisely on the problem to which the Senator referred. It deals with people who are in situ in early learning settings. The focus is on leadership for inclusion in the early years because that was identified as a real gap. It is done in partnership with the Government. It is blended with a kind of tutor support base, so it has been a very cost-effective way of adding capacity.

I thank Professor Hourigan.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. Professor Travers referenced a concern he has about children being educated in separate settings, with that cohort having gone from 2% to 5%. That was referenced by Professor Travers but any of the witnesses may answer my question. Do they feel teachers are equipped to address disabilities, including the most complex disabilities, in a mainstream class setting when they emerge from college?

The witnesses spoke about CPD which is really important but it is not in any way sufficient to update teachers who are assisting. It is a concern I share. From talking to parents, they do not have confidence in the mainstream setting to address the needs of a child who has a complex disability. This may be because they have come out of a setting like that and they then want a special school setting because the child's needs were not addressed. I am not just talking about education needs but also the use of restraint and seclusion. Are methods of dealing with behaviours of concern incorporated in training in order that people going into a classroom know how to deal with those situations?

The INTO spoke about was team teaching. What is the opinion of the witnesses on team teaching? It spoke about much smaller class settings - they are much too large anyway. Team teaching is where one teacher is a mainstream teacher and the other has a background in special education.

The Senator raised a lot of pertinent issues around the challenges teachers and parents experience in the system. As I was saying earlier, initial teacher education is foundational. It will take teachers to a certain level. The Senator mentioned a situation where a teacher who is newly qualified is in a mainstream class with children with very complex needs. In a scenario like that, I would expect the principal of the school to have oversight in terms of the supports that teacher requires to meet the needs of all the children in the class. I would envisage that an experienced SET would co-teach with or support that teacher in the class. Teachers coming from initial teacher education now have the disposition to collaborate and learn and want to include all children. With the proper supports, that can happen. It is challenge where some newly qualified teachers are placed in special classes where they may be overwhelmed initially. There is definitely an issue there.

There is also a misconception among parents that teachers in the special class or special school have specialist additional qualifications mainstream teachers do not have. That is not the case. They all go through the same initial teacher education programme. That voluntary CPD component can be problematic in terms of the specialist space.

I worked as a resource teacher shared between five schools as a young teacher. You learn very quickly who to collaborate with and you also realise how important parents are. That is a crucial piece in this. Parents are your friend in that. They know the child so well, they have all the information and can inform you. A lot of our focus in initial teacher education now is empowering student teachers to be able to have conversations with parents and work with their colleagues. As a resource teacher, I went into the class, worked alongside the class teachers and supported in the challenging situations. That is happening in schools all over now - team teaching, the sense of collaboration and special educational teams in schools. I have worked in disadvantaged schools as well. You are a team. It is very rare you would be left so isolated nowadays on your own. A lot of principals are taking that collaborative team teaching approach to supporting needs within schools. That is important. It is then up to us to support our young teachers to work in those settings, to not be isolated and to be able to ask questions, find out more about the child and inquire. We talked a lot about research. All of our young teachers have the skills of researching. When there is something new in their class, they can get the information. They have the skills around research. Schools are becoming much more collaborative in how they work and support special education, which is to be welcomed.

The contributions have been extraordinarily interesting. If I could pick out a commonality in relation to the four contributors, it was the idea of the growth of the reflective practitioner in schools. I worked close on 20 years with Hibernia College. In that context I am delighted to see Dr. Kelly here. I ask her to please pass on my good wishes to her team and thank them for helping in my educational development as well. That was very big with us in Hibernia College, the development of the reflective practitioner. It is so inherently important to the ability of teachers to respond to the great challenges in special education. I commend the colleges. Every one of the witnesses impressed me in their commitment to it. Professor Hourigan mentioned in passing something about 27 counties. I was wondering about that.

It is 27 counties on the island of Ireland.

I see.

That is for LINC. We have reach into the North.

Professor Travers spoke about the uptake and the great hunger in teachers for professional development. This is a commonality with all of the contributors - the great enthusiasm and commitment of teachers to invest in their own careers and in the services they supply to the children in their care. In relation to special education in St. Patrick's, my alma mater, I would like to put down a marker for the great leading light of special education back in the day, a very doughty Longford man called Páid McGee. He was so inspiring for us all. Unless some of the contributors want to come back in, it has been a very nice afternoon listening to them all. We will go out full of optimism.

I thank the Senator. Next up is Deputy Coppinger.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. The first thing I want to come in on is diversity in teaching because it is not very diverse. I agree if we want learners to respond, it is much better if they see representation from many different backgrounds. They may not have them today but do the witnesses have any statistics about in general how diverse teaching is? I recall when I started teaching nearly 30 years ago, there was a concern about the feminisation of teaching. People were getting into a big sweat about these poor young boys, they only have women to teach them. You do not hear that same concern about male-dominated professions like in the Dáil or loads of other professions. That is one aspect.

The other is getting more people from working-class backgrounds, minorities and different religions and ethnic backgrounds. In Ireland up to a fifth of people, I think, are from non-Irish backgrounds or mixed backgrounds, which is not reflected in teaching. I am aware of one teacher who is a Muslim. I do not know if there are any other Muslim teachers. She has an Instagram account, minorityteachersireland, where she takes up issues about which teachers themselves are quite ignorant.

What do the witnesses think should be done to change that and get more people in? I will have another question later.

I thank the Deputy for the question. I agree, although I do not have the stats in front of me on diversity in the teaching profession. I have just finished a four-year term on the Teaching Council, and I was part of many debates there. We are aware that there is a massive journey for the teaching profession to go on in terms of diversity.

Regarding this tertiary programme that we are just starting this September, it is the first programme of its type in the country. Essentially, what it is trying to do is build on the work that was done linking further education to higher education. Students can come into further education, do a year there and then do their four years in initial teacher education. What we see in the broad trajectory of who is coming into further education is more kids from migrant backgrounds and disadvantaged backgrounds. It effectively gives them a second chance. The CAO system is very anonymous, but it is quite brutal – it is a kind of Game of Thrones approach, almost.

One of the things we found was that although we had fewer than 30 places on the programme, we had over 1,000 applications for those places. We were totally taken aback by the scale of interest in it, which would suggest there was a hunger and thirst out there. The Deputy mentioned the Muslim teacher. There are a number of those kinds of profiles building up on Instagram and other platforms right now. I think there is a growing awareness among the teaching profession itself, and among the unions that represent teachers. We would have seen this in Mary Immaculate College historically, where there is hidden diversity, in that people are coming from different backgrounds, but if their difference is not visible, they are not talking about it. One of the things that is starting to change is people being much more confident in beginning to articulate that difference. They are the pioneers, and the more they are supported in doing that, the better.

There is a leadership piece for principals as well. I personally do quite a bit regarding CPD for principals. There is a leadership piece for principals in supporting that through their hiring practices. It is not just about the initial teacher education colleges producing a more diverse profession, but also about those diverse graduates getting jobs.

One of the big challenges for us at the moment, going back to our debates and the Deputy’s question, is that the students coming out of programmes where inclusion is really at the centre are the ones who are leaving. Interestingly, if we look at the Teaching Council register, we tend to see, unusually, that it is more the youngsters who are coming off the register whereas, historically, it would have been people heading towards the end of their career. We are haemorrhaging some of our best qualified people to the Middle East and Australia, which is also a challenge.

I am assuming the housing crisis is a key factor. Did Dr. Kelly want to add something?

I think the biggest challenge for the teaching profession at the moment is the lack of diversity within it. It is about opening up access and different routes to teaching and different pathways. The online blended model that we have allows people to work, stay at home with their families and study. We study in the evenings and on Saturdays. It is just one way, but it has opened this up to a huge number of people who never would have been able to be in a campus space. It is about innovative ways into teaching, broadening the pathways and thinking outside the box around it, but it is certainly the biggest challenge we have at the moment.

In Marino, we have pathways for attracting a diverse range of teachers with the migrant teacher project. We can happily send on some details about that afterwards. We have several pathways. I know the time is up.

I had another question but I will have to leave it.

Thank you. I am up next on the speaking roster. I again welcome the witnesses warmly. I graduated in September 2006 - 20 years ago - from Mary Immaculate College. I had 18 wonderful months there when I did the postgraduate entry into primary teaching. All of my experiences there were fantastic. I thank Professor Hourigan, Professor Teresa O'Doherty and all the education team who were there at the time because I can offer nothing but positives.

I have some questions for Professor Hourigan because Mary Immaculate is my alma mater. I will ask a systemic question. This is not a critique of Mary Immaculate College. Far from it. A few months ago, we were having a debate in this committee room about the Irish language. Our colleague, Senator Joe Conway, who just left a few moments ago, mentioned the term “functionally illiterate”. I had never heard of the term, and it captured my imagination when he elaborated on it. It means someone who has language skills for written and spoken words and basic grammar rules that are enough to get by and to converse. He said that was where the Irish language was at at that stage. He said it as someone who had vast experience as a teacher and principal and someone who had supervised the student education programme in the schools.

This really captured my imagination, and I went back and looked at it. In the whole ethos of self-reflection, it dawned on me that I am perhaps functionally illiterate in Irish. I will explain how I came to that realisation. As I was told in college, I would lead out all my Irish lessons through the medium of Irish. We might drop in an English word to help a child at the back of room, but I was giving it socks each day in the classroom, all through Irish. I arrived here as a TD and in my first week, I was thrown into a radio interview with our now President, Catherine Connolly, on the Tuam mother and baby home - just like that - on Raidió na Gaeltachta. It just collapsed there in front of me. I saw that I did not have the Irish to cover this, and very quickly, I went from having confidence, wearing the fáinne and being affiliated to Conradh na Gaeilge, to withdrawing from it and realising that my Irish was not up to scratch.

This is controversial. It is systemic. I would say that if any of us go back and pick up an old copy book from the 1990s and look at the aiste as Gaeilge that your standard Irish classroom child was able to write, it was outstanding. I do not know if it is the 1998 curriculum, second level education, the State examinations or the teacher colleges, but something has been vastly watered down. The entry point for Irish seems not to be good enough. We have children in many classrooms in their fifth or sixth year of primary education who are still doing dathanna or learning the aimsir chaite in sixth class, after eight years of it. I do not think all the answers lie in Mary Immaculate and the other colleges. I have come to the realisation that to save all of this, we probably need to move away from general teaching to having specialised teachers who will lead out the Irish language. They would walk the corridors and go into each room during the day, and maybe PE as well.

Will Professor Hourigan throw off the shackles and tell us her opinion? She can come at it from many perspectives. What do we do to save the language? Can the teaching colleges have a role in the conversation that needs to happen?

I attended Irish-medium second level education. I did my leaving cert through Irish and studied Irish in first year in college, but I would also struggle to do an interview on Raidió na Gaeltachta, even though I use Irish more frequently now in my role in Coláiste Mhuire gan Smál. There is a multiplicity of factors going on here. If anyone just tells you that there is one factor that is driving this, they are blowing smoke, and that is part of the problem. Part of it is confidence. Part of it may be the methods of delivery. There are a host of issues going on. The entry level for our undergraduate teaching programmes is a H4. That is not an extraordinarily high entry level, but at the same time, it is not basic either. It is still an honour.

Does the HEA set that?

It is set by the Department. One of the things that we are seeing is a Covid effect, and this has been identified. If I looked at the students coming in prior to Covid and the students coming in now, I would be more concerned about the students who are coming in. We are at the very tail end of the people who started secondary school during Covid, and we are now coming into the group of students who were in primary school during Covid. We know that during Covid, parents were able to help with English and maths, but a lot of parents were not able to help with Irish. I know that in my own extended family there are kids whose Irish never recovered from Covid.

I do not know if it needs the specialist teacher, but remedial action is needed. I would think that should be driven both by the NCCA and the Department. We need to get in there and recognise that we are actually coming from a deficit, even purely due to Covid alone, never mind the other factors, which are more complex. Based on that alone, if we want to sustain Irish in terms of our ambition, there is a need for an extra piece, whatever that is. That is my view.

I am very impressed with the answer. It is a refreshing and very honest answer. As a committee, we will probably have to come back to this again. I know there is probably a lot that the witnesses have to say. I know that Marino has an all-Irish training programme.

I am not laying the blame on any college here. From cradle to grave something is wrong systematically. The perspective of the witnesses on it is good. I am working on some policy stuff but I hope it is an issue our committee can come back to. When we do come back to it I think there will be many voices in the room that day-----

It is very important.

-----including those of the witnesses. Unfortunately, the clock is against us today. We could fill up several hours with this conversation. I apologise, as I know Dr. Flanagan in particular was trying to get in but the clock is against us. Maybe I could chat to her after the meeting. I have to stick to the rules myself as well. Senator Curley is next on the roster.

I thank all the witnesses for coming in. I enjoyed listening to the four contributions. I jotted down a few quotes from each speaker that I might have time to go through. My background is that I graduated ten years after the Cathaoirleach from the PME at secondary school level. I am an Irish and French teacher. I agree with everything the Cathaoirleach has said. There are Irish teachers at secondary school level who do not have conversational Irish. That is true. It is a fact. I have taught with one or two in various schools. I will not get specific or name and shame anyone, because it is not their fault. There is a systematic problem with the way we deal with the Irish language in this country, from five to 18 years of age, that we need to address urgently if we have a genuine aim to bring back the language. It is the aim of our own party but it should be a nationwide project to try to deal with it urgently. However, that is not what I am going to focus on today.

I suggested this session and next week's session as well purely with the CPD lens in mind. The initial teacher education that I received – that I imagine most students still receive – was really good. I had a really good experience. I have a real concern about it not being obligatory to do courses during the summer for inclusive education or special needs, even with the extra paid vacation days that primary schoolteachers get for doing them. The question I have for all four witnesses is whether they think it is dangerous that we do not provide annual school closure days to deal with inclusive education for all teachers in this country. Do they think it is dangerous to allow teachers into classrooms to treat kids in the school environment who have not been provided with the proper tools?

As I was saying earlier, the CPD space is the weakest in terms of systems and structures. The voluntary nature of it, the fragmented approach and ad hoc provision contribute to that. The framework pathway for it, Cosán, is developed through the Teaching Council. That framework is not fit for purpose on a number of levels in the inclusive education and special education space. It identifies six areas - seven if we divide literacy and numeracy - as areas of professional learning for teachers to develop. Inclusive education should be a core principle underpinning all of the areas of professional learning that teachers engage with. For someone doing maths, for example, it should be maths for all – STEM education for all, PE for all. That inclusive principle is embedded or permeated through everything that happens.

The second area of weakness that I would highlight is around the necessity for some specialist approaches or qualifications. From a children's rights perspective and from a parental trust perspective in the system, if a decision is made that a child would move to a specialist setting or provision, there should be some confidence that the teacher would have some additional or specialist qualification.

That brings me to my second question if Professor Travers does not mind. I am sorry but I only have one minute and 45 seconds left.

That is no problem.

Has a study been done on what percentage of students are unnecessarily separated from mainstream because of either a lack of teachers that have the resources to teach them in the mainstream setting or whatever reason?

Not to my knowledge.

I thank Professor Travers very much.

We do know that it has expanded.

I want to hear from the other witnesses. I will go back to the first question. I only have a minute left. If possible, I will race through all three witnesses. They can even give a "Yes" or "No" answer. Do they think the current system is dangerous where teachers with no training in special education can potentially go into a classroom with students who are neurodivergent?

I think that is where the whole-school training is missing. A lot of the in-service training course days are very mainstream focused. My background is as a special class teacher. I have been 18 years in a special class. We have in-service days but they are aimed at the mainstream. For example, no pathways are mentioned for the language and mathematics curriculum. That is where special class teachers feel a bit lost and they lose sight of their initial vision of what the inclusiveness of a special class can be. There is a place for whole-school CPD alongside specialist CPD for the individual needs of a child.

I thank Dr. Flanagan.

I agree with my colleagues. If I could go back to the piece about the child, I do not think there is any teacher standing in front of a child today who has not gone away and done their own research and who has not upskilled themselves. We can be confident that the teachers in front of students are doing their absolute best. Would we all like more in-service and professional development? Yes, 100%.

I am sorry. I did not get to ask the four witnesses. Do we have a second round coming?

No, I am so sorry. There is huge value to this meeting and we may have to come back to this again. I learnt that trick in Mary I by the way.

We did not have it in Trinity.

It never worked that well when I had children in front of me.

I might catch up with Professor Hourigan afterwards.

Yes.

We will go to Senator Nelson Murray and then we will have Deputy Cummins after that.

I thank everybody very much for being here. I will move close to the microphone. I am always getting given out to for sitting back from it. This is a brilliant session to have for our first session coming back. It brings us right back to why we are here and the importance of it.

I want to kick on from Deputy Coppinger's point. Yesterday, I was in a school in Navan, where I am from. Let us just say it was in a pocket area of deprivation. As I looked around the school what came to my attention was the multicultural aspects of the children and the working-class background – or even lower than that – and how unreflective of that are the teachers going through courses, who are the people they can look up to. The principal spoke to me and said that he said to one child "You know you can be absolutely anything you want - if you want to be a doctor, a teacher or a scientist." She turned around and said "But teacher, how can I be when I am from here?" I could not believe the response. Dr. Kelly mentioned that the diversity of our classrooms and communities is increasing and our teaching workforce should as far as possible reflect and understand that diversity. She also mentioned that blended learning attracts students from a wide range of backgrounds. That is desperately needed so that children can look up to people from their background, as has been mentioned, but we do not see it too often, be it from working-class backgrounds or ethnic minorities. That is something that, critically, needs to change.

The principal also said that some of the children leaving the school do not get a chance to go to the school they want to go to and they have to apply to a different school. That is another problem in itself. I was going to ask for the statistics as well on the diversity part. Perhaps it is something we could look at. I would love to see how many people from different backgrounds are applying to do the courses and how many of them are graduating and going on to work as teachers.

Professor Travers talked about people self-funding and the cost of courses being €16,000. That completely excludes a lot of people from trying to combine a family, employment and teaching.

Professor Travers also mentioned there was a scheme up until a few years ago whereby those who brought themselves on in teaching and went down the extra training route to improve for their students received a kickback on their salary but this is now gone. Is he saying the people who put €16,000 into it are doing it for the love of the job and are not getting anything back at all now, or is there something for them? There is not, at all. Wow, that is incredible. I was in the marketing profession years ago. If I had paid for myself to do a digital marketing course, I would have got more salary because I would have been more qualified in a different aspect of marketing. To me, that is something we need to look at and raise with the Minister.

Professor Hourigan stated that if inclusion is a national expectation, the professional formation required to deliver it will need matching stable public investment. Could she speak to me a little more about that, please?

The learning for us was really around LINC. This is where we, in partnership with Government, said there was nothing happening in early childhood settings around leadership for inclusion, so we would do something that is blended, meets people where they are at in terms of being in their settings, and is affordable and accessible. There are 3,000 graduates of LINC now. What is really interesting for us when we do the graduation ceremonies for LINC is they are so diverse. It is where one sees the various migrant groups being represented in a way that is quite striking in comparison with initial teacher education. I suppose it shows-----

Are they getting the jobs then afterwards?

They are normally in a setting already.

In a job, yes.

They do seem to get an increase for that but, again, because it is early childhood education, they are starting from a very low base.

As regards informal feedback on the diversity piece, one of the things that comes up in open days, particularly for students whose parents may be from Asian or African backgrounds, is that they often come from societies where teaching is not particularly well-paid or esteemed. This is not a get-out-of-jail clause for us but something we often hear is that their parents will direct them towards medicine or law, which they see as more esteemed routes. They often do not recognise, sometimes even in the case of kids from migrant backgrounds who go to Gaelcholáistí, how esteemed the teaching profession is, as I personally think it is. There may be a piece of work there. It is on the radar of the Teaching Council but I think there is more we can do to engage with those groups and demonstrate to them how valued and important teachers are. Many of our European colleagues have done that kind of work.

I have just a few seconds. Professor Travers had a chart relating to places filled and progression to a masters degree. He mentioned that they are totally oversubscribed. However, I also note there was a big decline from 2021 to 2026 in the number of people applying to do the graduate diploma in inclusive and special education. The number was 260 but then it dropped down to 191. Was that maybe caused by people realising it is very hard to get onto the course? Why does Professor Travers think that is?

It was purely to do with timing. It was advertised much later in the year; that is all.

So we do not have an issue there.

There is no issue there.

Excuse me for having to leave earlier. Leaders' Questions was taking place in the Dáil. I will have to leave again in a minute for Questions on Policy or Legislation. That is just how it is on these Wednesdays. The witnesses are all very welcome and I thank them for attending. It has been absolutely fascinating. I had a number of questions-----

I will give the Deputy extra time, but I am just looking at who is here. We may get an extra minute for everyone, going by how the time is elapsing. We will keep an eye on things. My apologies, Deputy Cummins.

It is mostly for post-primary. At primary level, it seems to be working very well in terms of being able to support children who have additional needs. At post-primary level, I am particularly interested in the amount of hours and weekly learning that initial teacher training has with regard to dyslexia, dyscalculia and dyspraxia. I have spoken to many parents on this issue. I am a parent of a dyslexic child who is an adult now. Many of the teachers she had and that children with dyslexia in secondary schools have do not have a huge amount of experience. How can that be countered?

The second issue relates to neurodiversity. How much do teachers at second level learn about neurodiversity and the different styles, approaches and supports they can give to children and young people in schools?

Gifted education was mentioned very briefly. I think it is one of the most under-appreciated areas because there is so much else that has to happen under the inclusive education banner. Gifted education just does not factor in there, so children have to go to places like CTYI. That child, particularly in primary school, ends up teaching the other students. They are not teacher assistants; they are gifted kids and they need to be challenged because, otherwise, it can lead to behavioural challenges and things like that.

The other question I have relates to special schools. I have been in contact with a number of parents over the past while and they have said their child's needs are not being met in the school because the staff are not trained to understand the very specific needs of that child. These are children with complex needs. I am interested in the initial teacher education. The training in other countries is that some teachers specialise in this area. We do not do that; we do a catch-all. Should we be moving towards ensuring that when we need specialist schools and specialist trained teachers, that they have that particular training? Are there supports for teachers who know they are not able to manage a child's behaviour in their school? How can they be supported? I invite any of the witnesses to answer.

Obviously, we provide primary teacher education in Marino. With respect to the training in special schools, generally, a lot of special schools have very complex children. There is no accredited training in Ireland. I went to Birmingham as a teacher, having taught in a special setting for 15 years, to do training there because there is no equivalent available here. There is a significant training gap. There is now the DCU induction course for teachers of pupils with severe to profound general learning disabilities, but outside of that in the whole country of Ireland we do not have any accredited training for teachers dealing with the most complex children, which to me is bizarre.

They are the most vulnerable children we have.

Absolutely.

If we look at it from an education point of view, we as a country are failing them because they are not getting an education because it is all about behaviour. If they are not regulated, they are not able to learn.

Teaching does look a little bit different where one is teaching a child with a severe to profound general learning disability. The teaching is the same but it looks a little different. We do not have any formalised training for the teachers in special schools. My understanding is there is quite a heavy involvement on behalf of the NCSE when the schools are set up, but then that training stops. I know a couple of special schools had the training before they opened, but they do not really have the school context in place then, with the dynamics or presentations of pupils in which to apply that, so it is possibly not the best model to have. We need ongoing training where teachers are already involved in teaching the children, and definitely some sort of accredited programme in Ireland.

That is also a huge challenge for EBD schools because that expertise is not there; teachers and staff in the school are left to figure it out. That has been quite striking for me - the cost of this education for the teachers and the fact it is off a teacher's back that they do it. It is fine if somebody goes off and upskills, but what is the standard then that the person has? There has to be a standard if you are going to work in other areas. In initial teacher education, there is a standard that has to be met. For any child attending school, no matter what level it is, there is a need to ensure the appropriate training is in place, is certified and has a bare minimum standard. Definitely, a maximum is where we need to be reaching. What is starting to come through as a result of the piecemeal approach is that schools are not able to cope with the level of need students have. The students are not able to cope because the school is not able to cope, and the parents are at their wits' end. There are also expulsions and whatever else.

We are probably doing well in the general things at primary level, but when it comes to very specific and complex needs, we are not. When it comes to post-primary, we are not able to cope with children who have things like dyslexia. Not every teacher has the skills they should have.

We have a post-primary professional masters programme. The students on that programme all do the same sort of inclusion modules that are happening in primary. They are all now doing the special school placement and will be assessed on that under the Céim standards that were introduced. There probably has not been as much CPD at post-primary level in this area. I think primary teachers probably have done a lot more over the years, but it is certainly coming and it is embedded in the initial teacher education programmes, exactly the same as it is for primary.

I thank Dr. Kelly. My apologies as I will have to leave the meeting again now. It has been really fascinating.

We will now move to Deputy Ní Raghallaigh. As I said, it looked as though it was going to be extremely congested but, all things staying as they are, we probably will get in for an extra short round of questions.

There are a number of members who might yet arrive through the doors and they will have to get speaking time too.

Gabhaim buíochas leis na finnéithe ar fad as a bheith anseo agus as an eolas sin ar fad a roinnt linn. It is fantastic. I really enjoyed listening to where the colleges were. I was in Marino myself. I was definitely one of those teachers who left and found myself in a special education setting and had to do an awful lot of CPD because I really did not believe I was capable. I did not have enough - we are trying to fit so much in our training.

I will focus on two questions today. There has been considerable work done around DEIS band 1 schools and EDNIP. I do not think we touched on it much. Professor Hourigan mentioned it helped to provide support before the onset of crisis. I would love to know what that support looks like. Does she think it is a model that could be rolled out more broadly?

My brief is special education. I spent the majority of my career in special education. I have had many constituents and people elsewhere around the State contact me. We talk about teacher shortages and alternative pathways for SNAs to join the workforce as a teacher. I remember subbing in a special school as a class teacher where the SNAs had a wealth of knowledge but they were looking to me as the class teacher. I have seen first hand the amount of experience they have. I do not know where I fall on it but I am curious to know what the witnesses think about whether there should be a separate strand of training for those who wish to specialise. A lot of people have contacted me. I have a letter here, for example, from someone who has a level 8 BA in early childhood education care and nearly two decades' work as an SNA. She is not looking for an easier route to becoming a qualified teacher but just an alternative pathway. I would love to hear the witnesses' opinions on that. I have been hearing from quite a few people on this.

We have EDNIP, which focuses on migrants, and TED, which focuses on disadvantage, but I think the piece where it is really coming together for us is city connects. This was something we developed in partnership with Boston College because it had been rolled out throughout very disadvantaged communities across American cities. This involved schools and teachers partnering with social workers and educational psychologists to create a wraparound, particularly for students at risk. The track record is one of remarkable success. We piloted it in the north-east inner city in Dublin and it has now been extended to 13 schools in Limerick and 12 in Tallaght. It must be said, there was huge demand. A number of schools were left out and they were very put out but that is because it was so effective. It is about spotting that child at risk and making sure all the services link up. Often, a small intervention by a speech therapist, for example, could make a transformational difference to a child when people see it in the 360 and they are partnering with parents. I am conscious of time with my answers.

On the second question, the Deputy is preaching to the choir on this issue. I am a very strong believer in recognition of prior learning, RPL, which we are seeing across higher education now as we see the building of links between further and higher education and recognising that people coming in with real world experience that is incredibly rich. I think there is further work to do both by higher education institution level but also at the Teaching Council level, which initially struggled with RPL. As someone who is an outgoing member, there is a lot more we can do to recognise, value and support someone like that.

On the second question, 20% of SNAs have a level 8 qualification or above, so that is a serious level of qualification among that group. One of the gaps in the workforce development plan is that it did not spell out a career structure for SNAs. That is something that could be looked at. In systems that have a separate undergraduate qualification in special education, there is a correlation with separate or segregated provision. Part of the reason for that is because general education teachers do not see themselves as responsible for children with additional needs. They see a separate qualification for those teaching those children and those teachers have that and those are not the children they are working with. It is better that specialisation comes at postgraduate level so that all initial teacher education is undertaken with the principle that you are responsible for the education of all learners and you develop an inclusive education identity as a teacher and you specialise afterwards. That would be preferable.

We will get a second round of questions in. There will be two minutes per member for those still here. I am next again on that roster.

Several colleagues have mentioned continuous professional development. Should that become compulsory professional development? There were times in my teaching career when there were courses I needed to do ASAP because there might have been a child who needed me to be more tuned up to meet their needs. There were other times where I might have picked a soft course because it was online and then got three days off in the summer. Let us not overstate this but that is a reality. Surely there has to be some compulsory thing? There are teachers saying that years after leaving college they need to brush up on special education. They acquire a lot in the classroom but they still need to brush up. They might need to brush up on the Irish language, too. What do the witnesses think about compulsory professional development? I am not trying to take away from the philosophies of education, sociology and all these subjects but the whole syllabus in training colleges is very crammed. At the end of the day, whether it is empathy, the skills to teach, or communicate with and understand children who might not be typical learners and need additional assistance, there is a lot of equal weighting given to subject areas when we should be concentrating on the skills of teaching, the communication of it, special education and basic management skills. Maybe I am oversimplifying this. I will go to Dr. Kelly on this.

On the latter, the “ologies” – those foundation studies – are absolutely key to creating and embedding that identity piece. Understanding the psychology and philosophy, the sociology of education, how children learn and how they motivate is core because it beds you in for the future and gives the solid foundation from which you can grow and develop other things. I would be a strong advocate of keeping all of those. They are really important in grounding a person. I remember back to the old days and the question of whether teaching was an apprenticeship or a profession. If it is a profession then we have to know what we are doing and we have to know why we are doing it. That is what that gives.

I do not think CPD should be mandatory. There are organisations and systems such as Oide, NCSE and NCCA. There is State provision of policies, procedures and supports for teachers that can give everybody those and I think the CPD should be a choice.

I thank Dr. Kelly and apologise for the time constraints. I will give Senator Curley equal time. He has 2 minutes 30 seconds.

I will touch on two things we did not get to get back to. I fully agree with Dr. Kelly. I think every teacher in the country is thirsty for knowledge. They want to be the best teacher they can possibly be. They are also extremely busy. They have family lives, they might be coaching one of the sports teams in the school or outside of school. Life happens and it is busy. I just disagree with her about the optional element of CPD in inclusive education. My belief, which is what I was getting at with the question I was asking, is that there should be an annual school closure day in every school in the country to deal specially with SEN and upskilling every teacher in the country. It would be at least once a year. Ideally, it would be loads of times a year but obviously schools have to do their daily business and it cannot be a free for all either and there needs to be a balance.

I think that is the role of Oide, NCSE and-----

I agree, yes.

-----and that it is not necessarily the person going and paying themselves, for example.

No, I do not think the university should be tasked with the process here. I just think that as a system it should be mandatory.

I never got to ask Professor Hourigan whether her belief would be that the system we have is dangerous when teachers are not always provided with CPD in SEN or may never have covered it. If they are more experienced teachers, they did their PMEs in the 1980s and 1990s.

I think "dangerous" is probably a bit strong given where our system is now. That is particularly the case for those in mainstream classrooms with children with challenges. There are nearly always SNAs there, so people are there to support the teachers. It is not, however, perhaps as effective an experience for the child, the parent or anyone else. The more upskilling and CPD people have, and the more qualifications and experience they have, the better will be the rewards.

One of my children is neurodivergent. She had support from someone very experienced when she was in primary school and it was transformative. I doubt if a newly-qualified teacher could have done that and been as effective in that space of time. It is, therefore, probably not "dangerous", but, potentially, it is certainly very different in terms of outcomes.

The question whether teaching is a profession versus being an apprenticeship was mentioned. I think teaching is both. It is necessary to have theoretical background knowledge, but it must also be treated as an apprenticeship. I thought my placement was an apprenticeship and the most I learned was probably in the classroom environment, with the theoretical knowledge I had learned beforehand. I do think, then, that teaching is a profession and an apprenticeship.

We will have to come back to that debate.

I pretty much agree with the Senator on that point. I call Deputy Ní Raghallaigh.

I am trying to think of something I can ask in two minutes. I found something the witnesses spoke about earlier very interesting. It was about expanding the diversity of our teachers. I am from Tallaght. On the street I am from, two of us became primary school teachers and one of us became a doctor, and that was not very common in Tallaght. I find that very interesting. My question is around affordability and expanding access to make it more affordable for teachers from these areas. Are any initiatives now running internally or being offered nationally to improve access for these lower-income students and to make teaching more diverse? I am referring to what the witnesses spoke about earlier.

The initiatives run across the spectrum. The HEAR scheme is being reformed. That is a points concession focused on students from disadvantaged backgrounds at the point of entry. Personally, I certainly feel that scheme needs to be reformed at this point in the way it operates, but we still need a HEAR system. We also have DARE. This is a scheme which looks at people who have all kinds of challenges and are diverse in all kinds of different ways. The scheme gets thousands of applications every year and those applicants also get a concession of 40 points. They are also supported when they come into the institution, as are the HEAR students. I think the DARE scheme, even though it could probably use an update, is probably more fit for purpose than the HEAR scheme.

Aside from that, in all our programmes, aside from the teacher education courses, we have always had an access track in all our programmes. For post-primary courses, we have a strong track of people who come in through our early childhood care or arts programmes and then end up in post-primary teaching or doing the PME for primary teaching. It is a slightly longer route, but they do get there. The challenge has been to navigate this accessible link from further education to higher education, but we are having a go at that now.

The other thing I think it is fair to say is that there has been significant growth at national level in terms of the programme for access to higher education, PATH, scheme in respect of recognising the need for more diversity in the whole of higher education but then also supporting kids as they are coming through. Among the positive things being addressed are the hidden costs of initial teacher education, which are definitely there.

Yes, definitely. I agree.

I am sorry about the time. The clock runs against us the whole time. A vote has been called in the Dáil now as well. We have a few moments to get back up there. I warmly thank all the witnesses and the organisations they represent, and their colleagues who have joined us. I told our clerk a short while ago that we need to find some pathway in the coming months to get the witnesses back into the committee. We will be undertaking a lot of work between now and Christmas and then more up to spring and we would like to hear the voices of the witnesses again as part of that work.

I am sorry that the clock was against us today. We will have the witnesses back again, please God. I thank everybody for all the work they are doing and the fantastic education teams and organisations they lead. I wish all their students, particularly those starting this year, the very best of luck as they embark on teaching careers. We are going to Mary Immaculate College on 15 October and we look forward to meeting Professor Hourigan and her colleagues. The secretariat will be in communication, but the college has some of the teams we are interested in. If we could meet some of those people, it would be massively appreciated. I thank everyone for tuning in and I also thank our secretariat and the technical team.